Host who is the wii that has to develop this . Guest the executive branch. Determining the focus of this bill is that we are requesting that the executive branch of the administration develop a broadband strategy, National Strategy, competence of strategy and public strategy so that recognizing the challenges and the threats, as we might term them that come from development of 5g technologies and other countries that we, from a government perspective or private sector perspective and from a public perspective, understand these challenges and potential threats and that we are moving toward the place of being able to ensure Greater Development of 5g technology here in the United States and that we raise recognition among the public of the challenges that exist within this space and that ideally we worked to ensure we are protecting American Consumers and companies and their data. Host is this a National Strategy . Nationalization of 5g in a sense . Guest a nationalization of 5g as the technology is concerned but its a recognition that when we are developing such a Significant Technology such as 5g and when we are talking about the transmission and talking about the use of this technology nationwide that from a National Perspective we need to have certain standards and recognizing that the standards are meant to keep consumer data safe and create a strong Playing Field for american comedies that will do right by consumers in terms of protecting data from potential exploitation and then there is the added challenge related to military technologies. 5g will allow for significantly faster relay of information. It has significant use within the Public Sector and in everyday business but also certainly for military use. Its incredibly important that we ensure that any technology are protecting consumer data used in the private or business sector but also military related. Congresswoman, most of the guest we have on this program come from the energy and Commerce Committee which oversees a lot of technology. You dont sit on that committee . Where did your interest come from . I sit on the Foreign Affairs committee and agricultural committee. For me Broadband Technology is pretty much a place for both of those committees touch. When we are looking toward the future of decision agriculture or technologies and precision agricultural tools that are allowing our farmers and producers to monitor their crop and ensure that they be insecurity other animals, particularly our dairy to use fertilizer depending on rainfall in other triggers. The use of 5g technology as we expected to continue to develop will be incredibly important. Notably within Rural Communities that could be benefiting from precision agriculture and there is no internet. Its not an issue of 5g technology but in interest of lack of access completely so i have been focused on access to broadband and access to internet issues within the agriculture actor within our Rural Communities in that part of my portfolio focuses on the agate committee and then separately my work on the Foreign Affairs committee and my background as an intelligence officer, former cia officer the recognition of the challenges or threats that come from a foreign country dominating and Technological Development is one hi i am can become attuned to and so my focus on internet from the plural perspective and Development Perspective and my focus on National Security threats and challenges from the Foreign Affairs perspective that while i am not on energy and commerce this is a particular area of Significant Interest for me. To help us delve into those issues our guest host this afternoon is Emily Birnbaum of the hill publication. Thank you for having me. You are talking about or in threats and the threats of having another nation dominating in the space of enormous technological innovation. Could you talk specifically as experts say that huawei and dte are at this point dominating the race quote and quote toward 5g. Why is that a point of concern for you that these two companies and what do you think is the best strategy to stave off that influence. Notably the billy past and house recently my 5g and beyond bill does not call out china specifically or huawei specifically recognizing that in the future perhaps some of our challenges might come from other countries but when we do look at those examples of huawei and dte there are significant indicators that because of huawei as an examples close relationship the Chinese Military and Intelligence Service that the use of Huawei Technology could create backdoors for areas of access to consumer data or company data that from an American Perspective we find unacceptable. There are others that even if it is not intentional because of direct links between huawei and the Intelligence Community that even chinas privacy standards and corporate practices are different from those we might find acceptable or legal. Some are recognizing whether its holy intentional or simply a matter of different Business Practices the priority does exist that as huawei continues to show strength in the development of 5g technology that we need to ensure that they reckon public and the american comedies recognize the threat and that we are taking effort and action to ensure we have an alternative. There are skeptics in real skepticism around this narrative that huawei is a National Security threats. There are some people who say we dont have evidence that they have or would create this back door or they pose a threat and this sudden and very intent and type huawei firm or could or is just another attempt to get a leg up on china in our ongoing technology and economic race, people say this is a really successful Chinese Company and one of the most successful comedies in the world and this pushed by the u. S. Is affecting their business. What do you say to that . That this is nationalism by another name. Guest i think it is an issue of competition. Surely recognizing that currently the United States needs to come up with a plan to better compete in this space isnt necessarily meant to do cap huawei but give American Consumers an alternative and potentially the nation an alternative. And i think for me that is the priority and i gave my intelligence background and im very aware of and attuned to the challenges the do come from countries in the technological space where there are links between corporate interests and intelligence and military interests but i think in any case, regardless of ones perspective, recognizing this is where we are moving on the technological front and ensuring that American Companies are competing and ensuring American Companies and our government have strategy to compete and frankly, the intent to compete is only going to benefit the consumer. If we are having an active dialogue about how to protect consumer data and Corporate Information in private business interests and information that should otherwise be considered a secret or specific to real privacy concerns. Thats a good conversation to be having in the American Consumer particularly in areas of technology where there are challenges even to understand the technology we are talking about. Your phone in her pocket makes your life easier but most consumers, myself included, dont always know how it works so ensuring we are having public dialogue that we want this technology to benefit you and so the future of Autonomous Vehicles and the future of the concept that you could have a surgeon performing surgery in one city on the patient in another because the technology is so fast that the promise of all this is so incredibly interesting and i think we as a federal government have a place and being a part of that conversation to ensure that we want to protect that data and we want them from an economic and privacy standpoint. Yet, i think this week Trump Officials are in the uk trying to encourage them not to implement or not to use any Huawei Technology in their systems. A lot of countries and a lot of western countries are opting for this partial ban of huawei where they wont use it in the core of their system but use it in the periphery so what do you think of some of our allies approach to huawei and do you agree with the Trump Administrations approach to them to make pretty aggressive threats if they do end up implement teen Huawei Technology . Guest i think the biggest or the starting point for some of these discussions and these threats is what information is it that we are sharing . The information were sharing with foreign governments. I think that as long as we are providing what is otherwise classified information in speaking specifically towards the intelligence liaison relationships that we have well, in this case, the uk one of our very closest allies that we share a tremendous amount of information i think it is within a right to express concern over how that of a patient is being safeguarded. As a former cia officer i know frequently the information that we share with other Intelligence Services is based on intelligence we receive directly from human assets or directly from individuals who would face grave ramifications if it were found out that they were providing information, information that is helping and diplomatic efforts and informing decisions made by the United States or made by our partners and information related to threats via foreign governments or foreign terrorist organizations and so i do think there is a priority for the United States to have a say and at least express concerns related to how the information that we are providing that could link back to someone else and some source or method. Host congresswoman, do you agree with the Trump Administrations approach saying dont use huawei, dont use z te clement in your systems . Guest i think some of the threat information is pretty clear in terms of this threat to the security of that information and the risk that it might be provided and i am currently not read into the full scope of what some of those threats would be but i do think that if there is an effort by the Trump Administration or frankly, by any administration to ensure we are safe guarding american information and in particular information we provided intelligence sharing than that is a concern i would take very seriously because it is one based on real specific threats. Host we have a lot of members of congress on this program and every one of them we asked the same question. Would you use a huawei phone . Last week we had andy purdy of huawei on the program and i mentioned that to him and here was his response. It is the democrats and republicans are right about china and many have said state Department Officials and others that its not about huawei but about the china government and with the china government in their view could force huawei to do. There are real service gritty risks in the world and all the equipment, the carriers and the equipment providers have to be subject to strict scrutiny and testing of products and conformance of measures because the bad guys can hack into everybodys product, particularly with the Global Supply chain equally embedded in china. Those are the things that are necessary to make sure america is safe going forward. Host congresswoman spanberger. Guest when i am choosing which type of technologies and choosing to purchase and provide my personal data across the risks that are present with Huawei Technologies are one im not willing to take. My answer to that would be no but i think mr. Purdy made some good points and talking about supply chain challenges and talking about threats that exist with any type of technology. Although things are true but its also simply the case that with the relationships between huawei and between huawei and the Chinese Government those risks are a bit more heightened. There is another part of the conversation which is huawei equipment is cheaper and obviously you are very invested in closing the socalled digital divides and you were mentioning before the fact that rural areas still dont have access to internet and rely on huawei as its huawei or nothing. How do you thank you can address that tension and further, do you think it is worth the enormous cost and obstacles to [inaudible] that some lawmakers have proposed . Guest i think the notion of ripping huawei out of the ground might perhaps be a step greater then we need to take at this time. I think youre right to raise the issue across but many People Choose huawei equipment because in fact it is cheap. Or cheaper than some of the other alternatives. Part of the reason its cheaper than other alternatives is because the Chinese Government involvement which harkens back to the challenges of having such a significantly tied relationship between huawei and the Chinese Government. I think part of the larger discussion needs to be about privacy concerns and about creating a path and recognizing it as consumers what is it that we want to pay for and what is a consumer choosing to purchase and i think this strikes back to what we talked about earlier which is some of these technological decisions are so great. I recently bought or wanted to have a new device to carry with me and i went looking at an ipad or another ring and the data that is available and how much they weigh, how fast they are, the speeds, the weight all of these things can be overwhelming for consumers. But it is all about choices and all about recognizing within our domestic market first and foremost how can we ensure that we are protecting consumers . Is that information or prohibition on certain pieces of technology or is that through conversations with american Technological Companies and Technology Companies about where they can really be engaged and involved and is that directing or in prioritizing the purchase of american items, not maybe directing but prioritizing for an american or purchasing standpoint to ensure that they are becomes enough of a push for these technologies to be created here at home and certainly i understand the challenge where it seems that there there is this notion that we will do things the best may not be the idea that we want to be conveying but it is an actually just about what to purchase american produced but its recognizing the threat that comes from the producers and be they American Technology or technologies that are produced by some of our closest allies. We as American Consumers and certainly me as a legislator, i think, as a legislator i think i have a response buddy to make sure consumers and American Companies know the risks that come with options that may come in the market. There is another product another chinese technological product that is a lot of alarm bells for people in congress and that is ticktock and it is really popular, massively popular, social media apps and when it first made inroads in western markets so inevitably there is a lot of concern i think the Chuck Schumer has weighed in on this and said we should not use this, army has banned it from the phones and so is that another area you are looking at an your concern about these foreign owned apps . Guest i think for some of your viewers tiktok first came on my radar is something that my childrens friends were talking about. At first i was thinking its like instagram or a videotape app but then you see tremendous reporting that provides great deal more information about the fact that it is the Chinese Company that your data may not be protected or associated with it. As it relates to tiktok in particular i think and i have not done much work on this so far but we pushed our 5g and beyond bill over the finish line at least in the house and that is exciting but i do think that what you are referencing is the next element of how we create that balance as a consumer and if they want to use that tiktok app that is their priority but where is the response ability to ensure that people recognize the risk and there is been great press reporting on the risks that did exist and thats been hobbled to the mark in public. Host in your previous jobs as u. S. Postal inspector, cia, did you use a lot of technology and were you involved in technology at that point . Guest no, not particularly actually read as a cia cop case officer i was out meaning foreign assets who were providing information to the United States government and so when i was doing so i did so without a cell phone and without any way i can be tracked. My level of awareness is the fact that when i would go out to have a meeting i would go out without any electronics or anything that could track me and and so recognizing the threat i have been trained and trained that if you have a piece of electronic avenue it can be hacked and it can be used as a listening device or used as in a nefarious way, even if it is just your phone or your everyday phone and because as a former intelligent officer that was top of mine that im aware of the risks that exist with the phone with the smartwatch and with any of these things that is essentially tracking your information. I was on the opposite side of thats where i was using a lot Less Technology than others. I heard that you have gotten cybersecurity checks in your office or theres a lot of concern that members of congress dont know how to practice good cyber hygiene and so that something that has been discussed. Guest everything that ive taken two trips overseas and ive gotten a phone that is check out from the travel office not associated with me and i many members do this but some dont know its a priority because you never know when you plug that phone and if it will charge or what might get loaded on it or where you use it and who might come in contact with it so that is one of the steps i take and also have had my office swept when people send us things and i will have my office ensure they are scanned to make sure theres no listening devices or other. Host are you unique in this regard . Ive not had this conversation with other members but i recently received a something to the office and i went out with our lovely staff assistant and have their check this for bugs and we knew a new intern was there and it was a creepy collar and so we had a chuckle as she explained that but the interesting thing about it and if you its wonderful how public our offices are but anyone can come in and any point and sign and having been on the opposite end of the intelligence collection i recognize how broad and how broad intelligence are in terms of what interesting to know about the legislative priorities for other countries and in this particular case, legislative priorities in the United States and the challenges between different parties or different groups and so i think that every member of congress should consider themselves potentially to be a target where people might be inclined to know what you are thinking or doing and certainly in my case when i was running my [inaudible] was publicly that was my standard form 86 which is the background check information and so that information was found and one of the former federal employees who was part of that large chinese hacking and so there is many, many federal employees that have background check information hacked by the chinese and we know its out there somewhere so the pieces in my experience is that we would have this relatively secure focused. [inaudible conversations] you checked out a phone from the travel office when you went overseas and do you find that members of congress understand technology and is that or are they the appropriate body to be legislating . Guest my answer to this is many fold. I think there are some members of congress who have significantly technological backgrounds either because of where they were in business or research and so they are perfectly wellpositioned to have personal opinions on this. We have some numbers of congress who have been in congress as long as email has existed so we run the gamut and when i think is an important thing to recognize is within our Committee Structure and within the Staff Members that we have on capitol hill who come from technological backgrounds, engineering background and who spend their time focused on these issues but frankly, on all issues that we as members of congress those who dont have a significant technological background and i have a Strong Security focus and perspective and my technological background is not as great in terms of direct personal experience but i spent time focusing on other countries Technological Capabilities so i know in return how many other countries have focused on ours. To answer your question, we as members of congress from the gamut but i think Overall Congress as a body does have at its fingertips of incredible amount of expertise and even with the nonpartisan Congressional Research that provides tremendous information the information that we need to be making these informed decisions is available to us on a daily basis. Those members, even if they were tech ceos or even have not had an email account they will continue to make make use of those resources. Host time for one more question. Emily. One more question given your background in the cia and intelligence, later this Year Congress is set to have a debate over a trio of surveillance authorities and one of which is section 215 and another famous disclosed phone record and its a pared down version but do you have any sense of where you will come down and do you think that congress should reauthorize these authorities and does there need to be reformed and how do you think it will play out, particularly given the fact that phone records programs has been shuttered . Guest i think my 30000foot view or perspective or response your question is anytime we are having discussions and debates within the halls of congress and within the media and within the Public Sector or spectrum of of the programs that we are authorizing in the programs we deem acceptable, particularly when it comes to basic privacy issues that is an excellent place to be. I predict that some of these conversations will be heated and the states will be pretty significant but when we are looking at the priorities of protecting consumer data and protecting the privacy and Civil Liberties and then we are looking at how to combat a potential threat in the immediacy particularly in the area of terrorism where we were in a post 911 place was in overdrive ensured they were protecting against what we were worried would be the next attack, with time and distance my expectation is that we will have again challenging space on this topic but its important and i am personally, whether its related to privacy or related to any patriotic related provisions or authorized use of military force at large i am of the opinion that congress should be weighed in on these issues regularly and that it is far too easy for us to say that was done in 2001 and authorized and have a generation later we dont have to have any accountability for what is happening. I do think there will be interesting debates to be a part of i think its vitally important element of our safeguarding our democracy to make sure congress and members of congress of the voices of citizens across the country have to weigh in on debate and ultimately vote for what we deem to be appropriate provisions for appropriate authorizations be it any Information Collection or maintenance or authorized use of military force overseas. Host representative Abigail Spanberger is a representative from virginia and Emily Birnbaum is from the hill. This can indicators and all others are available as podcasts. Television has changed since cspan began 41 years ago but our Mission Continues to provide an unfiltered view of governme government. Already this year we brought you primary election coverage, the president ial impeachment process and and out the federal response to the coronavirus. You can watch all of cspans Public Affairs programming on television, online or listen on every radio app and be a part of the National Conversation to see spans daily Washington Journal Program or through our social media feeds. Cspan, created by private industry, americas Cable Television company as a Public Service and brought to you today your television provider. Coming up on cspan2, speeches from todays u. S. Senate session on the coronavirus pandemic. After that the Supreme Court oral argument in u. S. Patent and trademark versus booking. Com. Later, the National Constitution center in philadelphia looks at the u. S. Patent and Trademark Office the booking. Com case argued before the high court. See spans washington journal live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. Coming up tuesday morning, we discussed the Airlines Response to the coronavirus pandemic with sarah nelson, then a discussion about the pandemics impact on facilities with the American HealthcareAssociation DoctorDavid Gifford and Michigan Democratic congressman dan [inaudible] on the antilock down protests in his state and the overall federal response to the virus. Watch see spans washington journal live at 7 00 a. M. Eastern on tuesday morning, joined the discussion and be sure to watch washington journal saturday at 8 00 p. M. Eastern. We are taking calls and questions from High Schoolers across the country preparing to take the advanced placement u. S. History exam. The senate returned monday after extending their spring recess because of the coronas virus pandemic. Remarks by Senate Leaders on the impact the virus is having on their state and the rest of the country. Let us pray. Oh god, of our salvation, deliver us from fear. Your might and majesty continue to bring us peace in spite of the challenges we face. Lord, we can meet these challenges with your power that transcends human understanding